Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by awesome_dude | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

awesome_dude

Anecdata isn't going to get us any closer.

Statistics gathered the way the are is all we have

View on HN

Are the statistics accurate?

Jeff Bezos said, "I have a saying, which is when the data and the anecdotes disagree, the anecdotes are usually right."

https://lexfridman.com/jeff-bezos-transcript/#chapter6_amazo...

I have a saying - if you think the data is bad because it doesn't match your narrative, go out and prove you have better data collection methods.

Anecdata is well known to be problematic.

> Anecdata is well known to be problematic.

Show me the data that backs that claim.

If its not true, then my anecdote that its true should suffice to make it true, no data required Q.E.D.

It's always been that way for me... is that not enough, you want actual data?

But.... you can get statistics on anything you like, if you are prepared to fund (or defund) them. If you pay to see the relation between crime and how many cats there are in a neighbourhood, you can get that! Ie statistics themselves are part of the game.

So, we believe nothing?

Or, we demand evidence that what you assert about this set of statistics is accurate

Given that you can just throw money at the solution you want to engineer, and create the illusion of science, perhaps believing nothing is a better position to be in. At least you're not buying into what is essentially just another avenue of corporate or governance marketing.

And sorry for bringing information to your attention. Just wait till you hear about how corporates fund law.

How do we know that your cynicism isn't funded by corporates in an attempt to undermine the real science?

You don't. How do you know your trust in corporates isn't an understandably conditioned response, given 13+ years of education?

That's weird - where can you point to me having any such trust?

I'm presuming that is the case, because you are questioning my straightforward and obvious suggestion that funding by corporations can provide whatever statistics you like. Feel free to explain your actual position if you want.

Thank you for admitting your logic has no basis in fact - which was clearly your approach when looking at your rejection of data.

Let me know when you are actually interested in science, facts, or logic.

You are putting words in my mouth. And not answering anything.

I made a statement, have defended it, asked your position, and in order to sign off with a bad faith message you put words in my mouth (that I admitted my logic has no basis in fact).

I presumed based on your complete and utter disregard for facts, logic, and scientific data, that it was all you understood, and it appears i was correct.

"Presumed". Awesome, dude.

"I'm presuming that is the case" - Veri lami

Reply on news.ycombinator.com